Follow by Email

Friday, October 30, 2009

Little Hitler in Iran. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Kim Jong-il in North Korea, Putin in Russia, Castro in Cuba, now Obama in America? Is the new USSA, The United Socialist States of America, REALLY inevitable? I really am starting to think that it just might be.

We do not even have to wait for the next thirty days for Obama to be sworn in. We already know that Barack Hussein Obama TOLD us that he wants a Socialistic Society. He wants and is putting in place people that can bring that into being. Now we even have a Climate Czar, if you will. Someone in the highest office to FORCE you to accept the scam of Global Warming. Someone to impose oppressive taxation and control over PERSONAL lives in the name of saving the planet from a threat that is complete BS. It does not exist.

To be fair, EIGHT out of these THIRTY TWO Czar positions were in existence during previous Administrations. Eight. But I do not believe ANY of them is Constitutional. They answer to no one OTHER than the President. No venting, no Congressional Review. NOTHING. The President says, BAM! There they are. With full authority and in some cases, even GREATER authority than GOVERNMENT ITSELF.

Going to the Emails today, we look at Obamacare. Another yet HUGH piece to the Socialistic Puzzle that Obama is trying to piece together.

Is Government Run Health Care Inevitable?

Americans who like making their own health care choices received welcome news yesterday when Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said he would be willing to block final passage of Obamacareif the government run health insurance program Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced Monday survives the amendment process during the Senate debate. Lieberman explained: “I think that a lot of people may think that the public option is free. It’s not. It’s going to cost the taxpayers and people that have health insurance now, and if it doesn’t, it’s going to add terribly to our national debt.

Lieberman is dead on. A government run insurance company will be massively more expensive than its proponents claim. Pressed by the leftist news organization Talking Points Memoto respond to “experts” who say the government run plan will actually save money, Lieberman responded: “Well all the history we have of health entitlement programs, including the two big ones that I dearly support, Medicare and Medicaid, is that they end up costing more than we’re prepared to pay, and they add to the debt, and then they add to the burden on taxpayers.” Again, the facts back Lieberman up here 100%.

Addressing the “opt out” clause in Reid’s proposal, Lieberman commented: “I would vote against a public option plan even with an opt-out because it still creates a whole new government entitlement program for which taxpayers will be on the line.” This is also true. A government run health insurance program would create a new entitlement program designed to do nothing more than force every American into government run health care. This is not a bug of the plan, it is a feature. Just ask proponents of the plan like Michael Moore who told Rolling Stone this summer: “If a true public option is enacted — and Obama knows this — it will eventually bring about a single payer system, because the profit-making insurance companies won’t be able to compete with a government run plan and make the profits they want to make.” Candidate Barack Obama’s own campaign website back up Moore’s claim, quoting Obama at a 2008 speech in Ames, Iowa: “If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system. … So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices. … Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system.”

The point is that no matter how the government run health insurance debate works out, Obamacare will move us closer towards government run health care. The only question is how fast it will do so. But there is still hope. Heritage Vice President for Government Relations Michael Franc explains:

But don’t lose heart. Conservatives will be in a position to prevail because, ultimately, America remains a right-of-center nation. And ultimately this debate will not just be one about our health system.

Rather, it will be a complex and layered debate about many other issues, issues where conservative values carry the day. Lawmakers will be hearing from their constituents on issues as varied and important as the individual’s relationship to government, the size and scope of that government, debt and deficits, our responsibilities to future generations, life (both at its beginning and its end), the level of taxation on individuals and work, job security, and privacy.

The only way to slow this train wreak down IS 2010, and YOUR Vote. YOU have the power. YOUR FUTURE LAYS IN YOUR HANDS. It really is, just that simple.Peter

Note: From The Emails is a weekly Segment every Friday, or occasionally anytime, that appears here at the OPNTalk Blog. Please feel free to Email any Articles, Comments, Thoughts, Whatever, that you may like to share to opntalk@gmail.com As always, you never know what you may see here.

President Obama on Wednesday signed a $680 billion defense appropriations bill, which will pay for military operations in the 2010 fiscal year. The bill includes a Taliban reintegration provision under the Commander's Emergency Response Program, which is now receiving $1.3 billion. CERP funding also is intended for humanitarian relief and reconstruction projects at commanders' discretion.

Yup. YOU, via your tax money will be going to FUND our enemy. Those that have increased attack on our Soldiers, and INCREASED fighting and attacks all over Afghanistan, since Obama took over as Surrender Monkey and Chief. Record high US casualties in Afghanistan and a General crying out loud, WE NEED BACKUP. What is Obama's plan? Instead of sending more Troops to actually WIN, we are going to pay them off.

I can hear them in the back rooms now. "Hey, it worked for the Italians. Let's try that. It may tick off normal Americans, but if we do not send more Troops, our Kook Base will still support our INSANE Agenda. It will buy us more time at least." {Sigh}

The buyout idea, according to the Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is to separate local Taliban from their leaders, replicating a program used to neutralize the insurgency against Americans in Iraq.

"Afghan leaders and our military say that local Taliban fighters are motivated largely by the need for a job or loyalty to the local leader who pays them and not by ideology or religious zeal," Levin said in a Senate floor speech on September 11. "They believe an effort to attract these fighters to the government's side could succeed, if they are offered security for themselves and their families, and if there is no penalty for previous activity against us."

ABSOLUTELY INSANE and INSULTING. On the anniversary of the deadliest attack on US soil, we have an insane KOOK in charge of the Senate Armed Services Committee, saying we need to FORGIVE, PAY OFF, and PROTECT, our Enemies. Yeah, That's the way to win a War. But it's NOT going to work. History tells us this.

This view that the delivery of aid will "buy hearts and minds" in Afghanistan has long been a mantra that the military use to fool the foolish. Variations of the theme have been repeated for the last seven years, despite the fact that it has self-evidently been a catastrophic failure. It was this theory which led to the deployment of military-led Provincial Reconstruction Teams around the country in 2003/2004 rather than the deployment of a properly resourced international peace-keeping force. Aid has been poured into areas where the insurgency is strongest and there is a direct relationship between the provinces which have received the most aid and those that are now de facto under Taliban control.

Rather than distribute aid according to criteria such as objective need or where it can do some good, troop-contributing countries channel it to areas where they have soldiers. Aid is effectively being used as a bribe to try to persuade people in these areas not to attack foreign troops. The most notorious example of this was highlighted a few weeks ago when it emerged that Italian commanders had been making regular payments to the Taliban to keep an area "quiet", but had neglected to tell the French battalion to whom they handed over responsibility – with the result that 10 French soldiers were killed in a massacre. However, such arrangements are fairly standard and the British have admitted arranging similar payments themselves.

If the strategy were effective, it might have some merit; but it is not. Criminal gangs shake down private contractors by threatening to stage attacks on them unless they get paid off. There is some evidence that it may even have spread the insurgency to previously quiet areas in order to attract aid. In the meantime, militias are reforming themselves into private security companies and hiring themselves out to contractors who use them to prove that they can get "aid" into areas of the countries where the NGOs refuse to work.

The crazy result of this strategy is that western taxpayers are probably indirectly funding the enemy that our troops are fighting. We are also helping to rearm the country's militias and weaken the authority of Afghanistan's central government – because of quite justified corruption concerns. The alternative is to tackle the problems head-on. Afghanistan is being governed by crooks and war criminals, many of whom should be in prison rather than their presidential palaces. There is no middle way between propping them up and facing them down. The latter strategy is certainly high-risk and it may be too late to attempt it now. But the former strategy has demonstrably failed, time and again, and will have to be abandoned eventually.

How many more innocent lives will be lost before we admit to this?

This from a guy that USE to believe that buying them off would work. Now, after losing some close friends and SEEING first hand that it is a failed strategy, he is warning against it.

That is not stopping the Liberal Loons in our Government from floating the idea of paying off the enemy. Clinton has even popped up again. Did you catch that? Yeah, I know most think that John Kerry is now the Secretary of State, by he's not. Clinton is. Well, on the books that is. Yes she is in Pakistan telling Students they have to chose a side.

In a lively give-and-take with students at the Government College of Lahore, Clinton said inaction by the government would have amounted to ceding ground to terrorists.

"If you want to see your territory shrink, that's your choice," she said, adding that she believed it would be a bad choice.

Clinton likened Pakistan's situation — with Taliban forces taking over substantial swaths of land in the Swat valley and in areas along the Afghan border — to a theoretical advance of terrorists into the United States from across the Canadian border. It would be unthinkable, she said, for the U.S. government to decide, "Let them have Washington (state)" first, then Montana, then the sparsely populated Dakotas, because those states are far from the major centers of population and power on the East Coast.

She said this.

"We are now at a point where we can chart a different course," she said, referring to past differences over an absence of democracy in Pakistan and Pakistani association with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

I guess she left out that the different course will be the US PAYING, in reality, FUNDING our Enemies, enabling them to attack us, and others, more efficiently.

Folks, I know some of you do not like this. But there is only ONE way to win a War. Kill more of them, break more of their stuff, than they do of you and yours. Peace is NEVER achieved without force. THAT is reality. Our Enemies know it. It's time our Cowards in charge LEARN IT!Peter

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

THIS is just patiently absurd. It is an insult to all the Troops that serve under King Hussein Obama. It is an insult to every Military Family that have lost loved ones fighting for our Country.

I guess I got out of Jacksonville just in the nick of time. I left Sunday, Obama arrived Monday, and did what he does best. When he is not throwing parties or playing Golf, he lies. Here he is in his own words.

Yes you heard correctly. Obama just said this.

"I will never hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests. I also promise you this, and this is very important as we consider our next steps in Afghanistan. I will never rush the solemn decision of sending you into harm's way. I won't risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary. And if it is necessary, we will back you up to the hilt."

WHAT? 55 dead in Afghanistan THIS MONTH! The Deadliest month in the entire 8 years we have been fighting there. Where are you backing THEM "to the hilt?" While you take time to analyze this "solemn decision" of sending more Troops to back up those DYING, they are DYING! Where is your promise RIGHT NOW Obama?

"Because you deserve the strategy, the clear mission, and the defined goals as well as the equipment and support that you need to get the job done."

YOU are NOT giving those DYING the support they need right NOW.

"We are not going to have a situation in which you are not fully supported back here at home. That is a promise that I will always make to you."

You are a lying Surrender Money and Chief. If you were to keep your word, you would be sending the 40,000 more Troops that the General is begging you for, as his Men and Women are dying.

Here is something for you to think about. Why now? Why do you think the attacks are increasing? Why do you think October is the deadliest month ever in Afghanistan? Why do you think 55 American Service People have been killed? Because our enemy does not fear Obama. That's the answer. He can SAY anything he wants. But his actions show the enemy that he is either ignorant, or a coward. Our Soldiers are dying, he is partying and playing Golf. He can no longer blame Bush. The blood of those 55 Soldiers are on HIS, Barack Hussein Obama's, hands. HE is the one to blame. SEND THEM BACK UP! Do what you just said Obama, back them to the hilt. I know, it doesn't fit your agenda. I know your afraid of the Kook fringe base of your Party. I know that you do not want Mikey Moron making a movie about you. But these are American children dying over there while YOU play President. Time for playing is OVER. Now BE the Commander and Chief.Peter

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

OK. Last night I posted the entire Harry Reid Press Conference of Healthcare. Dirty Harry came right out and total you what I have been telling you, the Public Option, AKA Government Run Healthcare WILL be in the Bill. However, he also completely and out rightly LIED to you.

Let's look at some of it this morning shall we?

"I feel good about the consensus that was reached within our caucus and with the White House. And we're all optimistic about reform because of the unprecedented momentum that now exists."

Outright LIE. The only momentum there is with this insanity, is that of those on the Left involved in attempting to shove this down our throats. If Snowe is true to her word, SHE is not even FOR this. Not with the Public Option.

"As we've gone through this process, I've concluded --with the support of the White House, Senators Dodd and Baucus -- that the best way to move forward is to include a public option with the opt-out provision for states.

Under this concept, states will be able to determine whether the public option works well for them and will have the ability to opt out, if they so choose."

What is the criteria? HOW can they opt out? What is the penalties for doing so. Folks, there is NO OPT OUT! This is also a lie. If it was so, then why put it in there at all? So they put this in, later it can be changed to mandatory. Trust me on this one folks. If all 50 States opt out, does it go away? Don't bet on it. This is the whole reason they are doing this. Government takeover of Healthcare, in which case, equals a Government takeover of one sixth of the entire Economy.

Let's look at some of the Q & A.

Is there a time limit for States to opt out?

REID: They'll have until 2014.

What does that even mean. Oh. That is something else I have asked. If our system is so broken, and we must do this NOW! In the next 30 days or so. WHY does it not go into effect until 2013? So the states have one year to opt out? What then? Again, HOW?

QUESTION: Two quick questions. One is, after your canvassing of senators on Friday and over the weekend in your caucus, do you feel 100 percent sure right now that you have the 60 votes (inaudible) to the bill (inaudible)?

REID: We've been working on health care as a Democratic Party, and much of that time we had Republicans helping us, since 1948. We've made significant progress these past months. As I've indicated, the American people believe there should be health care reform. I believe there should be health care reform and my caucus believes strongly there should be health care reform.

He never answered the question. I heard this live. He actually giggled when he was asked this. He is scared he really doesn't have the Vote. It was a nervous giggle. The Reporter pushed on.

QUESTION: (inaudible) trigger proposal for (inaudible) as well? And how close are you on that?

REID: No. .

QUESTION: No?

QUESTION: Senator Reid, with all due respect, is it possible to answer the question on whether or not you have the votes for this particular issue, the public option with states having the ability to opt out (inaudible)?

REID: I believe that -- I believe that we will be -- as soon as we get the bill back from CBO and people have a chance to look at it, which we'll have ample time to do that, I believe we clearly will have the support of my caucus to move to this bill and start legislating.

Again, HE DIDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION!

QUESTION: Senator, can you talk about your thinking in terms of why you went with the opt-out, as opposed to the trigger option, which we know is something you considered (inaudible)?

REID: I think it's the fairest way to go. I think at this stage in the proceedings, a public option, which has received so much attention, and the public option with an opt-out, is one that's fair and gives states -- in fact, if they don't want to be part of public option, opportunity to get out.

TRANSLATION TIME: If there did not seem a way for non-participation, it will NEVER pass. So they have to throw that it in an attempt to pass it. But like I said, once they are in complete control, they can add or take away ANYTHING they want.

QUESTION: Senator (inaudible) explain how -- exactly how states will opt out (inaudible)? And what about Olympia Snowe, who says no to the opt out?

REID: I spoke to Olympia on Friday. I've talked to her on a number of occasions. And at this stage she does not like a public option of any kind.

And so we'll have to move forward on this, and there come a time, I hope, where she sees the wisdom of supporting a health care bill after having had an opportunity, her and others, to offer amendments.

Again, he doesn't answer the question. HOW can States opt out?

QUESTION: Senator, does this mean then that the co-op idea goes by the wayside or will there be a co-op in this bill along with...

I understand you're raising the threshold on families from $21,000 to $23,000.

REID: You do? How do you know that?

QUESTION: I could be totally wrong. You know better than I do.

(LAUGHTER)

But tell me -- but AFL-CIO, labor says it's still bad policy. How do you respond to that, (inaudible) putting the costs of health care reform on the backs of middle-class families. What's your response to that?

REID: This bill is for middle-class families. Barack Obama, when we were involved in this health care, in the initial stages, in a telephonic conference call we had -- one of the things that President Obama said is we have to make sure, when we've finished this legislation, it is not legislation that's only for poor people; it's for the American middle class.

And that's where I've legislated since then, and that's what this bill does.

Another complete and utter LIE. This will INCREASE Costs on the Middle Class and DECREASE Healthcare for all. It will DESTROY the greatest Healthcare system in the world. Just the SHEAR COST of the Obamacare Plan dictates ALL will have their Taxes go up to pay for it. Not to mention Cap and Tax, Tax on this. Tax on that. Everyone's Taxes HAVE to go up. Then of course he blames Republicans. Blah, blah, blah. Then this.

QUESTION: You said earlier that you had the support of the White House. Did you ask them to make the calls on this? Are you going to ask them to help you get to the 60 votes?

REID: I haven't asked them to make any calls. They haven't been -- it hasn't been necessary to this point.

Have you asked Obama to pressure for the Votes? Not yet.

QUESTION: Senator Reid, the moderates seemed more comfortable with the opt-in approach. Why did you go with the opt-out instead?

REID: We have 60 people in the caucus. It's a comfort level is kind of -- we all hug together and see where we come out.

In other words, they will not commit political Suicide. So HOPEFULLY, we will be able to convince them to vote for this if they can lie to their constituents like I am lying to you about States being able to opt-out. We'll change it later of course. But we have to get the Votes FIRST!

Which I guess DOES answer the question, he DOESN'T yet have the Votes to pass this. I think the BIGGEST LIE he told yesterday was an attempt to get YOU to believe that YOU want this.

REID: It's something I believe in the state of Nevada. All the national polls show a wide majority of Americans support the public option. I think it's important that the matter that we work on in the Senate have a public option in it.

WHAT POLLS? What National Polls is HE looking at. Even the most Liberal of Polls out there are showing the MAJORITY of Americans, regardless of party affiliations, Religion, Race, or anything else, are AGAINST a public option. Seriously folks, NO ONE WANTS THIS. He just completely made that up. I guess he was thinking that you would think, "Oh, really? The majority is for this, well, then, I guess, so am I?" Can anyone show me a Poll where "a wide majority of Americans support the public option." Anyone? Truth is, opposition is GROWING AGAINST. not only the public option, but Obamacare in general. THAT is the reality of the situation. Reid KNOWS it. This is why he lied.

Just got back from my trip to Jacksonville. It was a GREAT Weekend. Fun was had by all. The Weekend even included a stop over at St Augustine, were moods were dashed just a bit do to the lack of time to spend more there. We will be making St Augustine a Weekend trip all in itself coming up in the near future.

Happy Tuesday to you. Since it IS Tuesday, it's time to check in on the Energy Front. Before I even started to scan for all things Energy in the News, I went over to check with our friend Jane at API. She Posted a question on Friday on the Energy Tomorrow Blog. Well, the sad this is, the answer is NO. Is Anyone Listening?By Jane Van Ryan Friday 23 October 2009

More voices are speaking out against the climate legislation being considered on Capitol Hill. Here's a sampling of some of the statements and studies that have been in the news during the past couple of days.

Sens.Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Kit Bond released a report showing that the Waxman-Markey climate bill amounts to a $3.6 trillion energy tax on transportation fuels. The study shows that from 2010 to 2050 motorists, workers and businesses would pay $2.0 trillion more for gasoline; truckers, farmers and businesses would pay $1.3 trillion more for diesel fuel; and airline passengers would be charged $330 billion more to pay for jet fuel.

Reacting to the Hutchinson/Bond study, the American Trucking Association (ATA) issued a news release to remind elected officials that diesel fuel is used to deliver nearly 70 percent of U.S. freight and virtually all consumer goods, including food, clothing and medicine. "Any substantial fuel cost increase imposed directly or indirectly on the trucking industry will cause the cost of all these essential products to rise," ATA said.

Deneen Borelli of Project 21, an African-American leadership network, said that 76 percent of black Americans want Congress to make economic recovery its top priority, not climate legislation. In a Baltimore Sun op-ed, he referenced a new poll showing that inner city, low-income workers believe they could feel the brunt of climate legislation costs. The survey shows that 65 percent of blacks believe lawmakers don't consider their economic and quality of life concerns when formulating climate policies. And more than 70 percent aren't willing to pay above 50 cents a gallon more for gasoline and $50 more per year for electricity.

Additionally, the Business Roundtable called on Congress and the administration to address climate change without hampering the U.S. economy. The Roundtable suggested that the United States enhance energy efficiency, maintain coal's long-term viability, encourage the expansion of nuclear power, expand and modernize the electric grid, and provide access for oil and natural gas exploration and production. "We need to put all energy sources on the table and commit to the development and deployment of advanced energy technologies," said Michael G. Morris, chair of the Business Roundtable's Sustainable Growth Initiative.

Add these voices to the thousands of Energy Citizens who rallied against the House climate bill during the summer congressional recess, and it's clear that many Americans are questioning the wisdom of the Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer proposals. But the question is: are Congress and the administration listening?

Folks, the answer is NO. Obama and Crew have an agenda and they are sticking to it. Publicly at least. From Obamacare to Cap and Tax. They can not NOT hear you. They KNOW what you are telling them. They understand that you do not want any of this. They understand that Cap and Tax has NOTHING to do with "Saving the Planet" just like Obamacare has NOTHING to do with Healthcare. That is NOT the real reasons what they are pushing either. They are both nothing more than POWER GRABS. Power, control, and of course, MONEY. They understand that the people that will be hurt most are the ones that can not afford to pay. The poor and down trodden will be hurt the most with these insane and unnecessary SCHEMES. Those that have to chose what to cut out when gas and Energy Costs Skyrocket, just to be able to go to work. But the sad thing is, they really do not seem to care.

Truth is though, they DO care about the Voting Both. The only thing they care more about than acquiring MORE power, is staying IN Power. So even if it seems that they do not care, or that they are not listening, privately, they are. Privately they are scared to death of pushing YOU to far. The question is, how far will they follow the Leadership down this path that they KNOW you want no part in going. Keep letting them know, YOU will not allow them to lead, if they continue.Peter

NOTE: Jane Van Ryan is senior communications manager and new media advisor at the American Petroleum Institute (API). In layman’s terms, she is a jack-of-all-trades who writes blog posts, produces podcasts and videos, and has been in the energy industry long enough to answer most of your questions. Before coming to API, Jane managed communications for a large science and engineering corporation, and for a top-tier research and engineering university. A few years ago, you might have seen her in your living room when she delivered the news on television. These days when she’s not working at API, she’s working on something else—her garden or her next book. Jane is the author of The Seduction of Miss Evelyn Hazen, a biography.

Monday, October 26, 2009

The last two weeks has been a great opportunity to work with the White -- White House, Senators Dodd and Baucus on this critical issue of reforming our health insurance system.

We've had productive, meaningful discussions about how to craft the strongest bill, the strongest bill coming from a meld of the two bills, the HELP bill and the Finance bill.

I feel good about the consensus that was reached within our caucus and with the White House. And we're all optimistic about reform because of the unprecedented momentum that now exists.

I'm aware of the issue of the public option. It's been a source of great discussion for many weeks now. As I've said here on a number of occasions, I've always been a strong supporter of the public option.

While the public option is not a silver bullet, I believe it's an important way to ensure competition and to level the playing field for patients with the insurance industry.

As we've gone through this process, I've concluded --with the support of the White House, Senators Dodd and Baucus -- that the best way to move forward is to include a public option with the opt-out provision for states.

Under this concept, states will be able to determine whether the public option works well for them and will have the ability to opt out, if they so choose.

I believe that a public option can achieve the goal of bringing meaningful reform to our broken system. It will protect consumers, keep insurers honest and ensure competition. And that's why we intend to include it in the bill that we submitted -- that will be submitted to the Senate.

We've spent countless hours over the last few days in consultation with senators who've shown a genuine desire to reform the health care system. And I believe there's a strong consensus to move forward in this direction.

Today's development -- that is, my sending in the next few hours to CBO a number of -- anyway, the proposal that we're sending to them for their scoring, will make us a step closer to achieving a bill this year that lowers costs, preserves choice, creates competition and improves quality of care.

Questions?

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

REID: I'm sorry. Say -- that that again?

QUESTION: Do you have a greater sense of (inaudible) with a public option (inaudible)?

REID: Obviously, public option is something that's been talked about a lot.

REID: It's something I believe in the state of Nevada. All the national polls show a wide majority of Americans support the public option. I think it's important that the matter that we work on in the Senate have a public option in it.

QUESTION: (inaudible) or is there a period of time where they have to (inaudible)?

REID: They'll have until 2014.

QUESTION: Two quick questions. One is, after your canvassing of senators on Friday and over the weekend in your caucus, do you feel 100 percent sure right now that you have the 60 votes (inaudible) to the bill (inaudible)?

REID: We've been working on health care as a Democratic Party, and much of that time we had Republicans helping us, since 1948. We've made significant progress these past months. As I've indicated, the American people believe there should be health care reform. I believe there should be health care reform and my caucus believes strongly there should be health care reform.

QUESTION: But Senator Reid, particularly on this idea of a public option with an opt out...

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: (inaudible) trigger proposal for (inaudible) as well? And how close are you on that?

REID: No. .

QUESTION: No?

QUESTION: Senator Reid, with all due respect, is it possible to answer the question on whether or not you have the votes for this particular issue, the public option with states having the ability to opt out (inaudible)?

REID: I believe that -- I believe that we will be -- as soon as we get the bill back from CBO and people have a chance to look at it, which we'll have ample time to do that, I believe we clearly will have the support of my caucus to move to this bill and start legislating.

QUESTION: Senator, can you talk about your thinking in terms of why you went with the opt-out, as opposed to the trigger option, which we know is something you considered (inaudible)?

REID: I think it's the fairest way to go. I think at this stage in the proceedings, a public option, which has received so much attention, and the public option with an opt-out, is one that's fair and gives states -- in fact, if they don't want to be part of public option, opportunity to get out.

QUESTION: Senator (inaudible) explain how -- exactly how states will opt out (inaudible)? And what about Olympia Snowe, who says no to the opt out?

REID: I spoke to Olympia on Friday. I've talked to her on a number of occasions. And at this stage she does not like a public option of any kind.

And so we'll have to move forward on this, and there come a time, I hope, where she sees the wisdom of supporting a health care bill after having had an opportunity, her and others, to offer amendments.

QUESTION: What determinations, Senator, have you made -- what determinations have you made on...

(CROSSTALK)

REID: Well, just a second here.

QUESTION: What determinations have you made on the other controversial parts of this, the affordability measures, subsidies, all those other things that are dividing senators?

REID: What I said in the beginning is this: We had a bill from the HELP Committee and a bill from the Finance Committee. This is a meld of those two bills. We've sent to the Congressional Budget Office a number of proposals, a number of alternatives that is a different meld of those two bills. And so that's what we did.

And it has information from both of those committees in it. Decisions had to be made as to what different issues would have to be eliminated from one of the two bills, and we did that. And we're now within hours of CBO getting it. I've had a number of conversations today, meetings with Doug Elmendorf, the head of CBO. I understand that situation quite clearly.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Senator, does this mean then that the co-op idea goes by the wayside or will there be a co-op in this bill along with...

I understand you're raising the threshold on families from $21,000 to $23,000.

REID: You do? How do you know that?

QUESTION: I could be totally wrong. You know better than I do.

(LAUGHTER)

But tell me -- but AFL-CIO, labor says it's still bad policy. How do you respond to that, (inaudible) putting the costs of health care reform on the backs of middle-class families. What's your response to that?

REID: This bill is for middle-class families. Barack Obama, when we were involved in this health care, in the initial stages, in a telephonic conference call we had -- one of the things that President Obama said is we have to make sure, when we've finished this legislation, it is not legislation that's only for poor people; it's for the American middle class.

And that's where I've legislated since then, and that's what this bill does.

QUESTION: Senator Reid...

(CROSSTALK)

REID: Yes?

QUESTION: Senator Reid, the Democrats have been working for months for Olympia Snowe. Can you explain a little bit more about the confirmation (ph) to do with that? Are you looking at a Democrats-only approach now? Are you willing to look on the Senate floor, if that's where the votes are...

(CROSSTALK)

REID: I'm always looking for Republicans. We looked for Republicans on this. We looked for them on extending benefits for unemployment insurance. It's just a little hard to find them, and we've had to do a lot of this on our own.

We're going to continue working. We invite Republicans to come and try to improve this legislation.

You know, one of the things that's been so astounding to me is, when I came here to the Senate, we had a lot of moderate Republicans who worked with us on everything, and we worked with them.

But, of course, now, the moderates are extremely limited. I could count them on two fingers. And as a result of that, it makes it...

(LAUGHTER)

... it makes is really hard -- it makes is really hard to get help from them. I think they're making a big mistake, not helping some things, as I've indicated, like unemployment extension, FAA extension, highway extensions, all these things that are some important to the American people, and of course, health care, which Republicans in years past have worked on health care.

We've had Republican -- we had a Republican president who worked extremely hard on health care reform.

But this modern Senate Republican, who, in my opinion, don't represent the thought process of Republicans throughout the country, haven't been willing to help us on anything.

So we hope that Olympia will come back. She's worked hard. She's a very good legislator. I'm disappointed that the one issue, the public option, has been something that's frightened her.

QUESTION: Senator Reid, is the opt-out the only option that you're sending to the CBO? Is the opt-out...

REID: No, the -- yes. On that -- on the public option?

QUESTION: Yes, sir.

REID: Yes, that's right.

QUESTION: You said earlier that you had the support of the White House. Did you ask them to make the calls on this? Are you going to ask them to help you get to the 60 votes?

REID: I haven't asked them to make any calls. They haven't been -- it hasn't been necessary to this point.

QUESTION: Senator Reid, the moderates seemed more comfortable with the opt-in approach. Why did you go with the opt-out instead?

REID: We have 60 people in the caucus. It's a comfort level is kind of -- we all hug together and see where we come out.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

First, I'm not here. Seriously. As you read this, I'm in Jacksonville Florida. I will not be back until Sunday Evening. I am ACTUALLY working on the Big Sunday Edition Friday night. No Health and Science today. Just not enough time.

Welcome to the Big Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog. Glad you could stop by. You know, it's a good thing I am away. After this, I will need a break just to calm down. Obama Insanity is starting to effect my health and well being. I need a break. But fret not I will return on Tuesday.

Since I'm not here, the Links will not work. I can not link to something that is not there yet, so just scroll down. If you are someone that gets this preview in the Emails, then just click onto the OPNTalk Blog and scroll down.

Don't worry, the links should be up sometime Sunday evening. All that in a second. First, I want to take you back to last Sunday's Preview. I said this.

So what do I think about Balloon Boy? You know what I mean. Richard and Mayumi Heene frantically called 911 to say that their Helium Flying Saucer got away with Little 6 year old Falcon Heene inside. After hours of manpower, Helicopters, Police, Fire, Rescue, and suspense as the world watched, little Falcon was hiding in the Attic.

Sorry folks, but looking at all this, and looking at this family, SOMEONE NEEDS TO GO TO JAIL! I'm not kidding. When asked why he {Falcon} did not come down from the Attic when he heard his Mom and Dad call him, he said he was doing it for a SHOW! The family has been on a Reality TV Show Twice, video tapes nearly any and everything that they do, and now are appearing on whatever show will have them to discuss this "near tragedy."

Problem is, it IS a hoax. They Video Taped the launch. There never was a basket on the balloon, Falcon was hiding, and there was no way he could have got up TO the Attic without help from his Father or a latter that was not there. So this whole thing was a farce. In my opinion, the kids are nothing more than pawns for the Parents to get the attention and get on TV. Someone needs to do something about it. I see CPS is involved and I just hope that they do not split up the kids. But the Parents? I do truly feel someone needs to go to Jail.

(CNN) -- The wife of a Colorado father at the center of the "balloon boy" saga told authorities that the giant helium balloon was specifically created for a hoax to draw media attention, according to court documents released Friday.

Mayumi Heene told Larimer County investigators that she and her husband, Richard Heene, knew that their 6-year-old son Falcon was hiding at their Fort Collins home the entire time, even as police and military scrambled to search for the boy, according to the documents.

The admission by Mayumi Heene was made October 17, just two days after the balloon was released, according to the documents.

The Heenes initially told authorities that they believed their child had flown away on the balloon, and when the balloon landed without him, they expressed concern that he may have fallen out of the device.

The couple hatched the plan about two weeks before the incident and "instructed their three children to lie to authorities as well as the media regarding this hoax," according to the documents.

Calls to David Lane, Richard Heene's attorney, and Lee Christian, Mayumi Heene's attorney, were not immediately returned Friday.

Richard and Mayumi Heene are each facing a number of local charges, including conspiracy, contributing to the delinquency of a minor and attempting to influence a public servant, Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden said Sunday.

Lane told CNN earlier that the sheriff was overreaching and that the family deserve the presumption of innocence.

The Federal Aviation Administration is also investigating the incident.

Richard and Mayumi Heene met in a Hollywood acting school and pursued fame for their family in the world of reality TV, Alderden has said.

The Heenes have appeared on the ABC program "Wife Swap." Richard Heene also chases storms, brings his family along and takes videos. TLC, which produces the show "Jon & Kate Plus 8," said the Heenes had "approached us months ago" about a possible show, "and we passed."

Told ya so. I'm glad to see them, uh, her, admit it. We'll have to wait to see how this plays out.

Anyway, go get your go go juice, whatever that may be, and lets get right to it.Peter

OK. Let's get this out of the way. I'm tired of people asking me what I think of Obama's indecision and delay in sending more Troops to Afghanistan. Do I think that it is because he is afraid of upsetting the Far Left Liberal Kooks? The Anti-War crowd for fear that he will loose their support with Obamacare? Do I think it's because he doesn't care about the Troops? Or could it be that he just truly believes that all we have to do is play nice with those that want us dead and they will fall in love with us and all will be alright? YES!

Folks, Obama IS The Surrender Monkey and Chief. He has our Men and Women dying over there, a General crying out loud for back up. Send more Troops. He spends 40 minutes with the General on the Ground, then calls for meeting with the Surrender Monkeys themselves. The same Senators, some of which never spent day one in a uniform, some who did EVERYTHING that they could, not short of, but INCLUDING TREASON, to attempt to force a loss in Iraq. Why? For SOLELY Political reasons. To attempt to hang the loss around then President Bush's neck.

"The War is Lost." "Our Soldiers are killing men and women in cold blood." "Our Soldiers are terrorizing women and children in the dead of night." "Just air-raiding villages and killing civilians". Oh wait, the last one WAS Obama. These idiots are the ones that Obama is taking Military advice from?

We have a General calling out to anyone that will listen that he needs about 40 THOUSAND more troops or all may be lost. Obama? Going to $30,000 a plate fundraisers, holding parties in the White House with "Earth Wind and Fire." Of course, then you got the TV. It's like Obama is saying,

"I hear ya. I understand that you are losing Troops. I get it. And, uh, one life is , uh, to much. So I am working hard at, uh, well, OK, uh, solution. Yes. I'm the President, and I uh, well, I uh, I will get back to you. I have this Party Tonight, I have to be on TV Tomorrow, and the next day, and uh, well, the next day, uh, OH yeah, I'm going to play some Hoops tonight, so I will get back to you soon. You know, BEING President is hard work. Some Tough Decisions have to be made. I will make those tough decisions, as soon as Obamacare gets passed, uh, I mean, well, uh, soon. I hope anyway. Better be soon. I want Obamacare NOW. Oh yeah, I support you, and you are doing a fine job over there. Keep up the good work. America is evil, uh, I mean America is PROUD of you. And, uh, so am I."

Truth is folks, he has an agenda and he is sticking to it. He does not care about the Troops. He does not care if we lose in Afghanistan. He simply does not care. YES. He is afraid of losing support of the Anti-War, far Left fringe Kook Base. He knows that if he DOES send more Troops, they will start attacking him, just like they did Bush. He will lose their support on all things. But what he cares about most, Obamacare, will TRULY be dead without them.

This is a no brainer. The General, who's Troops are having bullets flying past and in some cases INTO their heads, CRYING for more Troops. YOU SEND THEM! No need for debate. No need for thought. American Soldiers are in trouble, we need to BACK THEM!

So what do I think of Obama's indecision and delay in sending more Troops to Afghanistan? The Blood of EVERY Soldier that gets maimed or killed, before Obama decides to send them help, is going to be on Obama's own hands.

By the way, did you catch this? A Halloween costume that depicts a SPACE Alien, you know, little green guys. Well, in this case Grey. A SPACE Alien in orange prison garb emblazoned with the words "Illegal Alien" is creating a big uproar forcing Target, and others to REMOVE it from the shelves?

I love this.

A few miles away in the Little Havana neighborhood, workers at a popular costume store said it was not something they would carry because it was discriminatory. They do stock a human taco costume, replete with a Mariachi hat.

{Laughing} Illegal Alien, WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE, is discriminatory, but a human taco costume, replete with a Mariachi hat is not. Idiots.

Anyway, back on October 7, 2009 Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) introduced an Amendment that would FORCE the Census to add a question of Citizenship. WHY NOT?

Now I know that this is a purely Political move. That failure to comply will NOT effect funding to the States with the most, nor will it be used for ENFORCEMENT of Immigration Laws. To which I ask again. WHY NOT? No, the reason for this is an attempt to distribute Power and Control more "fairly." Illegals do not get Representation. They, being ILLEGAL, do not enjoy the benefits of actual CITIZENS. Nor should they. Here is the Press Release from October 7, 2009

Bennett Pushes for Citizenship Questions in 2010 Census

WASHINGTON D.C. - Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) and Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) introduced an amendment today that would only allow continued funding of the 2010 census if the census includes a question of citizenship status on all future decennial censuses.

"The system is broken and areas of the country with high illegal populations should not be rewarded with greater representation in Congress" said Bennett, a member of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs committee. "The decennial census is an overwhelming and extremely expensive undertaking and it must be done right."

The amendment is based on the Fairness in Representation Act, introduced by Bennett last month. The bill would require the Census Bureau to include a question on its decennial census asking whether the individual is a citizen or lawful resident of the United States. It would further direct the Census Bureau, that for the purposes of apportionment of congressional seats, the population should be based on the number of legal residents of the United States.

Neither Bennett's bill nor the amendment introduced today would affect federal funding to states. It is also important to note that by law, information collected by the Census Bureau is completely confidential, and therefore Senator Bennett joins the bureau in urging all respondents to return their census form and feel confident answering honestly.

In other words, no one is coming to get you. So tell the truth. Are you here Illegally? {Sigh} Sure they will tell the truth. Right. But WHY NOT at least ask the question?

It always amazes me that they can never find Illegals when they CLAIM they are enforcing the Law, yet anytime a News Organization has a story to tell, they have no problem finding any number of them willing to go on TV.

I'm with ya Senator. Let's ask the question. Let's make sure that the power some have in Congress is legit. Illegals do not deserve Representation. They have not earned that RIGHT by going through the Process. The problem you are going to have with the Left, is THEY are the ones that make up a lot of their Districts and they get a lot of money from these advocacy Groups that represent THEM.

Another problem you are going to have with the Public in whole, is that at the end of all this, it really means nothing. One, they will lie. Two, there is no enforcement. Three, there is no 'incentive' for the States to enforce this question being added. Much to do about nothing. I understand WHY you are doing it. However, really, what's the point?Peter

{Sigh} Thankfully is is being pulled due to THOUSANDS of complaints. There is NO REAL SCIENCE to back up ANY of this BS. NONE. Now they are simply taking a page out of the Communist Brainwashing Playbook. Remember back on March 24, 2008 I posted this. Chicken Little Crowd To Attempt To Brainwash More Americans

The need for a different approach is apparent, environmentalists say.

"We've come up against a brick wall with Americans," says Lee Bodner, executive director of ecoAmerica, an environmental group based in Washington, D.C. Despite Americans' widespread familiarity with global warming, "only a small group are changing their behavior."

There's little research on how to lower people's energy use, but early evidence suggests that many people will change if:

• They think others similar to themselves are jumping on the "green" bandwagon.

• They get frequent positive feedback for effort.

• They feel able to make a difference by taking concrete steps.

• They think their children will be harmed by global warming, or children encourage the family to lead a greener life.

This is to good folks. They are TELLING the rest in the movement. Here are the talking points. Read this again. "You have to convince people that they are not just sheeple. That everyone is doing it, so they should too. Make sure you give them a pat on the back when they do. Make them feel that they are now a good person. That they matter. That they are heroes for doing this. They also have to "believe" that THEY can solve it. Don't be going around telling them that there is no hope. Make sure they know 'we can do it.' If all else fails, tell them their kids are going to DIE. That they will blame them for not doing anything about it. Scare them into submission if need be."

What if the people ask for proof? "Just tell them that all the Scientist agree that it is real, and they are smarter then them, so they need just accept it. Any Scientists that say it's not real are just kooks, or bought off by big oil."

This is the very definition of Scaryence. Scare Science. "Don't forget, if all else fails, the KIDS. Bring up the kids."

Hence THIS Government TV Ad. Can you say desperation? Remember, using the Kids is the last resort.Peter

I have to pull out the entire Trophy case again. I'm not really sure who to award this one to. There is so much wrong with this, it is not even funny. It is DANGEROUS. Insane at the same time.

So VP Joe Biden is sent over to Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic to assure them that we, Obama, The US, did NOT stab them in the back by announcing its plans for a reconfigured missile defense system on September 17. Why? September 17 2009 was the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland at the start of World War II. Why? Because Obama gave the reason that Iran was not as close as we thought to making a Nuclear Bomb, nor having the capability to deliver such a weapon. Which of course we know is an OUTRIGHT LIE! He had the report the whole time telling us that they have another Secret Nuclear Facility and had the means to produce one TODAY! THEY ARE STILL DENYING THIS!

PRAGUE – Vice President Joe Biden made significant strides during a trip to Central Europe this week in relieving anxieties the Obama administration stirred up last month when it scrapped a Bush-era plan for missile defense.

Biden won agreement Friday from the Czech Republic to join Obama's reconfigured missile defense system, just two days after Poland said it also would take part. The NATO chief, meanwhile, praised the new plan as offering good defense for the West from future Iranian threats.

FUTURE? The Future is HERE folks. But there is a VERY good reason WHY the NATO Chief is happy, and it is the same reason YOU should be scared as hell. Keep reading.

"Ministers welcomed the fact the new approach puts European missile defense more into a NATO context," NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in nearby Bratislava after U.S. Defense Minister Robert Gates briefed alliance defense ministers on the system. "It is good for solidarity."

We are giving NATO say on OUR Defenses. They will have power and control over us, our defense systems, and will weakening our Allies. But I guess "It is good for solidarity." Right?

Russia vehemently opposed the Bush-era plan, which would have put missile interceptors in Poland near Russian territory and in the Czech Republic — areas in its Cold War sphere of influence. When Obama suddenly announced last month that he was scrapping that plan for a reduced missile defense system linked to NATO, many Poles, Czechs and others in the region feared it marked a capitulation to Moscow — a power still viewed with deep suspicion in much of the former Eastern Bloc.

That IS why Obama did it. EXACTLY why. He is an Appeaser.

Warsaw and some in Prague were also stung because the new system would give them reduced roles, a disheartening prospect because they counted on Bush's plan to tie their security destinies closer to the U.S., which is still viewed as the only credible guarantor of stability as Russia grows more assertive.

Obama doesn't care.

But those fears seem to have dispersed with Biden's stops this week in Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic.

Charles Kupchan, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, said Biden appeared to achieve Washington's objective of reaffirming U.S. interest in Central Europe.

"The Biden trip was principally an effort to calm nerves and to reassure countries of Central Europe that the U.S. was not losing interest and pursuing rapprochement with Russia at their expense," Kupchan said.

OF COURSE HE IS. Israel anyone?

American officials have said some of the initial criticism was unjustified and based on a flawed belief that the U.S. was completely giving up on the plan.

Not giving up, DESTROYING the plan DELIBERATELY.

Biden conceded the U.S. could have done a better job introducing the new plan. "Obviously it could have been done better," he told reporters in Prague. "But that's the reason for the trip. I think I set out on behalf of the president to convey to three central European allies that we're committed."

He said he was "absolutely convinced" after the trip that the three countries' governments and opposition leaders now "have no doubt about the commitment," adding that "missile architecture was more sort of a metaphor for 'are we committed?'"

{Sigh} Why do these Idiots, the Liberal Loons, actually believe that just by a smile and a wave, and a little appeasement, the World will love us and those that want us dead will just play nice? It is not, never was, nor will it EVER be true. NATO is happy because Obama GAVE them this new plan of his. THEY ARE INVOLVED! Listen to this insanity.

Under Obama's new missile defense plan, U.S. Navy ships equipped with anti-missile weapons — such as the Navy's Standard Missile-3 — would form a front line of defense in the eastern Mediterranean. Those would be combined with land-based anti-missile systems to be placed in Europe.

Poles in particular were appalled the U.S. announced its plans for a reconfigured missile defense system on Sept. 17, the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland at the start of World War II. They felt that timing showed a lack of sensitivity, and Polish tabloids accused the U.S. of stabbing Poland in the back while political experts described Obama's plan as a slight.

Obama's proposal calls for a focus on short- and medium-range interceptors to better counter expected threats from rogue states such as Iran. The Pentagon says the SM-3 anti-ballistic missile is the most technically advanced and cost-effective way to counter Tehran's anticipated arsenal.

STOP! READ THAT AGAIN! This time the important words to take away from this are in RED.

Obama's proposal calls for a focus on short- and medium-range interceptors to better counter expected threats from rogue states such as Iran. The Pentagon says the SM-3 anti-ballistic missile is the most technically advanced and cost-effective way to counter Tehran's anticipated arsenal.

I thought that they were not building a bomb? I thought that they were YEARS away from even the thought of the ability to build and carry these weapons. GET THIS!

Obama has said the old blueprint was scrapped largely because the U.S. concluded Iran is less focused on developing the kind of long-range missiles for which the Bush-era system was developed.

{Sigh, Banging hand on desk} THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE! Obama KNOWS, he has a report RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF HIM, HE KNOWS THAT IRAN HAS NOT STOPPED, NOR WILL THEY EVER STOP. He knows that they will carry out their plans if they are not stopped. {Sigh} Folks, this is INSANE. Completely and utterly INSANE!

With Biden's visit to Warsaw on Wednesday, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk — who weeks ago said he would use more caution in signing onto deals with the U.S. — had resorted to language more typical of his pro-U.S. nation, going so far as to describe Polish views as "identical" to those of Washington.

BS.

The Czech Prime Minister Jan Fischer on Friday said, while standing beside Biden, that his country "is ready to participate in the building of such a new architecture."

Promises were made and lies were told.

The United States was "very appreciative of the prime minister's statement today," Biden responded, adding that Washington would send a high-level defense team to Prague next month to "discuss the terms this participation will take."

THAT ought to be interesting.

Neither Biden nor Fischer gave any details, and it remains unclear if the Czechs could even deliver on any promises made now by Fischer's weak caretaker government. A new Czech government will be formed after elections in May.

So THAT is why Biden went now. Makes sense. Just think about that one for a second.

In Russia, the Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko on Thursday welcomed Obama's decision to dump the Bush-era plan, and said Moscow will carefully watch the next U.S. moves on missile defense. He said Russia was still conducting "a thorough analysis" of the new proposal.

Gates, the U.S. defense secretary, said he hopes Moscow will join the new missile defense system, saying it "will be much easier to tie it in with Russian capabilities."

Russia is on a quest to bring back the good'ol days of the USSR. We have talked about this before. Putin is STILL very much in charge. Obama is trying to appease them. Meanwhile, Obama is on a quest for Tyranny right here.

Sorry folks, I have no idea who to award this week. Biden for going over there and flat out lying to them. Obama for sending him to do so. Obama for continuing to further the LIE that Iran is not working on a bomb, nor means to deliver it. Obama for giving NATO power into our defense system. Just the shear stupidity on displayed here. So I give the IWA to Obama and Crew. The entire Administration. They lie, cheat and steel to get whatever they want. Biden is just one of many that Obama surrounds himself with.

Seriously folks, I'm not playing Politics here. I'm not saying the Republicans are that much better. The farther they move away from their Conservative Base, the more and more they become Lib Light. But we KNOW what path we are heading down with Obama and Crew. AMERICA itself is at stake. Remember what Lord Christopher Monckton warned us about?

Obama is ready to sign this Treaty, in essence, giving away American Sovereignty to the UN. We just learned that he is ready to give power and control of our defenses, at least in part, to NATO and Russia, of all people. His continuing to appease those that hate us, and denouncing, ignoring, and stabbing our Allies in the back, and his continuing quest for Tyranny in this country, we can see that we live in DARK DAYS.

Absolute power, corrupts absolutely. We need balance back in Government. The only chance we have to slow this utter destruction of the Constitution and America itself is if you do your part in 2010. I did not like it when the Right was in total control. It's a slippery slop no matter who it is. But the difference is, the Certifiably Insane were not running the show. No one was attempting to destroy this country. I'm not saying all Democrats are evil or wrong. I'm not say all Democrats are insane. But those in the Leadership, those Obama appointed to Czar Positions, unaccountable to ANYONE but him, ARE! The Leadership of the house, Pelosi, the Leadership of the Senate, Reid, ARE INSANE and they are attempting to, and succeeding to, destroy the Economy, lose the War, and take over as much of the Private Sector they can. Time to go. Time to Vote. Time to say to Obama, "not this time." Idiots all.Peter

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Happy Thursday to you. I will not be here tomorrow, so we have a special From The Emails Thursday. I will be getting ready to head to Jacksonville Fla. this Weekend. Can't wait. So today we are going to go to the Emails. As always, fret not, if there is something in the Emails that I REALLY want to share, I will do so no matter what day it is.

This one is from BG, who included this note: "Good article." I agree. As some of us have already asked Obama and Crew, we already know the answer. But since so many like to point out how GREAT Socialized medicine is, and give examples of it in Canada and the UK, let's look at another aspect of it. Will Obama and Crew submit themselves to this Utopia of Universal Healthcare?

Stunning! Britain's National Health Service care standards may be good enough for ordinary folks, but the people who work there know better. They are getting taxpayer money to pay for their own private care. The UK Times reports:

"THE National Health Service has spent £1.5m paying for hundreds of its staff to have private health treatment so they can leapfrog their own waiting lists.

More than 3,000 staff, including doctors and nurses, have gone private at the taxpayers' expense in the past three years because the queues at the clinics and hospitals where they work are too long.

Figures released under the Freedom of Information act show that NHS administrative staff, paramedics and ambulance drivers have also been given free private healthcare. This has covered physiotherapy, osteopathy, psychiatric care and counselling - all widely available on the NHS. [....]

The health department defended the practice and said sending doctors, nurses and other key staff for private treatment helped to get them back to work."

In order to serve the people better, the "public servants" must be treated better than the ordinary people. This exact logic was used in the old Soviet Union to justify very different treatment for the elite, who naturally could not bear the poverty they forced on the rest of the populace.

It is time that Americans learn and use the concept of nomenklatura, the communist version of a ruling class. In the Soviet Union, party members and high officials had special stores, vacation facilities, health care, cars, and much more. Money didn't define the rulers; political status did. No matter how much money a consumer had, there were still lines and shortages at the stores selling meat, toilet paper, and many other things which were deemed "luxuries." For the nomenklatura, special outlets closed to the public were abundantly stocked, and prices were affordable.

Do you suppose that Obama and Congress ever plan on being dependent on ObamaCare? They have exempted themselves.

Never eat at a restaurant where the owner and staff do not dine themselves. And never agree to a health care system whose own providers refuse to take part in its level of care. Unless, of course, you have no choice.

Your right BG, EXCELLENT Article. Real life example that shows the Rhetoric doesn't equal reality. If it is SO GREAT, then one would think that ALL would want it. It's not. Those that are attempting to bring it about want no part of it themselves. So why should we?Peter

Note: From The Emails is a weekly Segment every Friday, or occasionally anytime, that appears here at the OPNTalk Blog. Please feel free to Email any Articles, Comments, Thoughts, Whatever, that you may like to share to opntalk@gmail.com As always, you never know what you may see here.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

"There should be no mistaking that we do not today — nor will we ever — accept a BLANK with nuclear weapons,"

"the peril posed by the BLANK regime" has become "even more lethal and destabilizing."

He said the U.S. is firmly committed to providing BLANK with deterrence against those threats "with the full range of military might, from the nuclear umbrella to conventional strike and missile defense capabilities."

The Blanks SHOULD read Iran, Iranian, and Israel. But they don't They read North Korea, North Korea, and South Korea. According to the AP - Gates says US won't accept nuclear North KoreaBy LARA JAKES, Associated Press Writer Lara Jakes, Associated Press Writer – 31 mins ago

SEOUL, South Korea – U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Wednesday the United States will never accept a North Korea with atomic bombs, saying the communist regime poses threats "even more lethal and destabilizing" than before.

Gates arrived in Seoul on Wednesday for a two-day visit for annual defense ministers' talks with South Korea after a stop in Tokyo.

"There should be no mistaking that we do not today — nor will we ever — accept a North Korea with nuclear weapons," Gates told a group of American and South Korean troops at the U.S. military headquarters in central Seoul.

Gates said "the peril posed by the North Korean regime" has become "even more lethal and destabilizing."

He said the U.S. is firmly committed to providing South Korea with deterrence against those threats "with the full range of military might, from the nuclear umbrella to conventional strike and missile defense capabilities."

The U.S. keeps about 28,500 troops in South Korea to help defend the Asian ally against the North.

North Korea's nuclear and missile programs have long been a key source of security concern in the region.

Yes THANK YOU BILL CLINTON. He gave them all they needed because they said it was for energy and promised to be good. {Sigh}

Gates said the North's atomic program is a serious security challenge not only on the peninsula, "but for the region as a whole." He also called the impoverished regime a "serious proliferation threat."

"Everything they make, they seem to be willing to sell," he said.

The communist nation conducted nuclear tests twice — first in 2006 and the second in May this year — and is believed to have enough weapons grade plutonium for at least half a dozen atomic bombs. The North has also sought to advance its long-range missile capabilities.

News Flash, They ALREADY HAVE THEM.

Efforts to end the North's nuclear programs have often stalled because Pyongyang has backtracked on disarmament pacts. Some analysts say Pyongyang has no intention of giving up nuclear programs and could seek recognition as a nuclear state, like India.

North Korea pulled out of six-nation nuclear disarmament talks in April before conducting the May atomic test blast and a series of ballistic missile tests.

But in recent months, it has reached out to Seoul and Washington. The regime has freed detained American and South Korean citizens, and leader Kim Jong Il said earlier this month that his country could rejoin six-party nuclear talks, depending on the status of direct talks with the U.S.

Does ANY of this sound familiar? Seriously. We could and SHOULD be substituting Iran and Ahmadinejad here.

Still, the North mixed the conciliatory mood with some provocations, like a barrage of short-range missile tests earlier this month. Analyst Koh Yu-hwan at Seoul's Dongguk University said the North's move is aimed at bolstering its negotiating position ahead of direct talks with the U.S. with a warning that it could again raise tensions at any time.

North Korea has long sought direct negotiations with the U.S. The communist regime claims it was compelled to develop atomic bombs to cope with what it calls "U.S. nuclear threats."

Ahmadinejad quotes?

"We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them."

"The real Holocaust is what is happening in Palestine where the Zionists avail themselves of the fairy tale of Holocaust as blackmail and justification for killing children and women and making innocent people homeless."

Uh, that last one sounds an awful lot like Obama. Doesn't it? More quotes?

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury."

"Remove Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations."

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land. As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

"If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d' tre, Israel will be annihilated."

"Israel is a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed."

"Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm."

Their views of US?

"[There is] no significant need for the United States."

"Iranians possess delicate characteristics. They introduce their merits, which are extremely attractive to whole the world."

"We are ready to hold dialogue with all countries of the world except for the Israeli regime."

"Those who insulted the prophet should know that you cannot obscure the sun with a handful of dust. The dust will just get back and blind your own eyes."

"We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point - that is the Almighty God. My question for you is, 'Do you not want to join them?'"

"There are no limits to our dialogue."

"Do you think you are dealing with a 4-year-old child to whom you can give some walnuts and chocolates and get gold from him?"

These are just a handful of quotes from 2006. Since then he has called for the Death of America, continued to deny the Holocaust, and call for the destruction of Israel. Since then, he has gotten to a place where he could create a Nuclear Bomb TODAY, and has the capability to launch a rocket into space.

He has come right out and said that Sanctions will not work, and they haven't. He has come right our and said ANY threat against Iran will meet with devastating fire. He is on a quest to carry out all his threats. But unlike North Korea, we could stop this before it goes ANY farther. We could knock Little Hitler right back into the stone age with a couple of well placed bombs. Done.

North Korea already HAS them. If we were to engage North Korea, we would have devastating consequences. Great lost will occur on both sides. North Korea is similar to the Cold War days of the USSR. Do we really want Iran to get there also? Problem with Iran is, they do not want Nuclear Weapons for deterrents, THEY WANT TO AND WILL USE THEM!

The U.S., which denies making any such threats, has said it is willing to engage the North in direct talks if assured such negotiations would mean Pyongyang ends its boycott of six-nation disarmament discussions involving the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the U.S.

Meanwhile, North Korea's No. 2 nuclear negotiator, Ri Gun, was in Beijing en route to the U.S.

Ri is scheduled to attend a security forum in California early next week before flying to New York for a seminar. South Korean news reports have said he is expected to meet with the chief U.S. nuclear negotiator, Sung Kim, to set up bilateral talks.

Well isn't that sweet? So what do we do NOW about Iran? Where is the tough talk THERE? No, Iran we invite to a BBQ. {Sigh} Meanwhile they continue to smile and build their Bomb.Peter